Ram Ji Lal Suman Controversy
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
4 days ago
- India.com
Ram Ji Lal Suman Controversy
Ramji Lal Suman's harsh words! New uproar begins! While giving a statement on Kalash Yatra, he said, 'They provide route for Kalash Yatra but want to stop Baba Sahib's Shobha Yatra.
The Print
6 days ago
- The Print
No plans to drop ‘socialist' or ‘secular' from Constitution, govt tells Rajya Sabha
'Any discussions regarding amendments to the preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions,' Meghwal added. Responding to a question by Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman, the Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal stated in a written reply on Thursday that 'the government's official stand is that there is no current plan or intention to reconsider or remove the words 'socialism' and secularism' from the preamble of the Constitution'. New Delhi: The Central government has no current plan or intention to reconsider or remove socialist or secular from the Constitution, nor have any proceedings been initiated for the same, government has informed the Rajya Sabha. The Union Minister mentioned that the Supreme Court has already affirmed the validity of 42nd Constitutional amendment in 1976, which inserted the words socialist and secular in the preamble. 'In November 2024, the Supreme Court of India in the case of Dr Balram Singh and others Vs Union of India and another's, the Court has also dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment (42nd Constitutional Amendment), affirming that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution extends to the Preamble. The Court clarified that 'socialism' in the India context signifies a welfare state and does not impede private sector growth, while 'secularism' is integral in the Constitution's basic structure,' Meghwal said in the reply. He said that while certain office bearers of social organizations have expressed their opinions to remove the words to create public discourse, this has not changed the official stance of the government. Referring to the statements of office bearers of certain social organisations, he stated, 'Regarding the atmosphere created by office bearers of some social organisations, it is possible that certain groups are expressing opinions or advocating for reconsideration of these words. Such activities can create a public discourse or atmosphere around the issue, but do not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government,' he added. In June earlier, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale had said that terms like 'Socialism' and 'Secularism' were forcibly inserted into the Constitution — a move that needs to be reconsidered. The RSS leader was addressing a program on the 50th anniversary of the Emergency held at Dr Ambedkar International Centre, jointly organised by the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (under the Ministry of Culture), where he said that the Emergency imposed on the country on June 25, 1975 was the 'biggest blow to Indian democracy.' The comments were later criticised by several Opposition leaders. This report is auto generated from the Reuters news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content. Also Read: The Preamble won't be changed back to the original. Here's why
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Hindustan Times
‘No move to drop secular, socialist from Preamble'
The government has not initiated any formal legal or constitutional process to remove the words 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution, the Union law and justice ministry informed Parliament on Thursday. Responding to a question by Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman, Union minister of state (independent charge) for law and justice Arjun Ram Meghwal said that no formal decision or proposal has been made on the matter. The remarks come amid ongoing calls by some public figures and BJP leaders to revisit the inclusion of the two terms, added during the Emergency in 1976. (PTI) Meghwal acknowledged the 2024 Supreme Court observation that socialism reflects India's welfare state status and secularism forms part of the Constitution's basic structure. He underlined the difference between public discourse and official policy, stating, 'Regarding the atmosphere created by office bearers of some social organisations, it is possible that certain groups are expressing opinions or advocating for reconsideration of these words… but this does not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government.' The remarks come amid ongoing calls by some public figures and BJP leaders to revisit the inclusion of the two terms, added during the Emergency in 1976. Former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar called the insertion a 'betrayal' of the Constitution's original vision. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma echoed similar sentiment. And Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said a debate should be held on the relevance of the two terms. 'During the Emergency, the country had no functioning Parliament, no rights, no judiciary and yet these two words were added,' he said at an event in Delhi on June Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan also criticised the terms as not being a reflection of India's cultural values. The remarks sparked sharp political pushback. 'The Constitution irks them because it speaks of equality, secularism and justice,' Rahul Gandhi said on X. Jairam Ramesh accused the BJP and RSS of pushing for a new Constitution, despite electoral rejection of such ideas. 'The RSS and BJP have repeatedly given the call for a new Constitution. This was (Prime Minister Narendra) Modi's campaign cry during the 2024 Lok Sabha election. The people decisively rejected this cry... yet demands for changing the basic structure of the Constitution continue,' he said. Meghwal concluded in his response that any amendment to the Preamble would require broad consensus, and that no such process is currently underway. 'Any discussions regarding amendments to the preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions.'
